IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume XIII, Issue 576, 11 May 1868, Page 3

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COIIMONS.—M.vr.cn G, ISGS,

THE ALABAMA CLAIMS,

After the transaction of other business Mr Siiaw-Lefevre, member for Ecu-lug. called up the question of the Alabama claims. Ho made a long and eloquent speech on the subject, in which he urged the settlement of this vexed question on the plan proposed by the American go verninont ; in calling for the papers on the subject, and in moving the consideration of the question, be disclaimed ae- r feeling of prejudice. All future negotiations, be said, would add to the complications already existing. Ho sketched the progress of the recent civil war in the United States to its happy termination. Re said the fail of Fort Sumter evoked the famous proclamation of President Lincoln. In less than a month after the appearance of that proclamation Great Britain had recognised the Southern insurgents as belligerents. They had no fleet, but they purchased their slops in our ports, These ships, notwithstanding the vigorous measures of our government to stop them, eluded our vigilance, went to sea. and were hospitably received af the British colonial parts. They captured and destroyed during the war more than two hundred American merchant vessels. In less than two years the United States flag was literally driven from the seas, while the commerce cf Great Britain wm doubled. For tinreason, the speaker thought wo ought toi treat these claims generously. They wore first made in 1862 by the American Minister, Mr. Adams. After a warm eulogium on the course of Mr Adams on this and other questions, Mr Lefeviv said that an arbitration of the matter hud been proposed by the American Crovornnient, hut* was refused by Lord Bussell, who repelled .the suggestion. Lord Stanley might have taken the ether course, ns the Tories had changed on the question of household suffrage. The question of recognition by England was only as to her right, if there were a right that might safely bey preform! but Lord Stanley insisted that the res ponsibilify of England was only a moral one in the Alabama case. Lite speaker thought the less said about morality on (his question the better. He regarded the breaking out of war between England and the United States as extremely unlikely but thought, on the other hand, that ah needless irritation should be shunned. Lord Stanley then took the floor. He praised the pacific tone of the oration of Mr Lcfevre, and warmly complimented Mr Adams for the conciliatory spirit he had displayed in the subject under discussion. He said we could not make indiscriminate concessions, but wo could learn the right of the case. There never was a case yy here there yvas more need to understand the points. Much allowance was to be made for (he feelings of the United St ates. Great Britain in the same case (with five hundred millions of debt contracted through a ciri! war, in which a million lives had been lost), might appreciate the case better than mere lookers-on only. He thought England had been entirely ncut al; but no neutrality would have pleased America. What that country wanted was neutrality, coupled with warm sjmuathy and supportIbe Queen was ready to arbitrate and submit all questions but the great point of recognising the belligerent rights of the South. Nobody contends that at no time the South acquired them. If not, why deny the right ot Great Britain to recognise them at the time she did ? The Gem-

federate ship Alabama did not axil from England until 1562, and the battle of Bull Run was fought in 1861. Admitting that it was wrong for Great Britain to recognise the South, would the United States government say that its case asrainst the Alabama had been altered had Great Britain made a declaration of neutrality six rather than eleven months before she sailed? Lord Stanley then referred to the speech of Daniel Webster in the United States Senate on the subject of recngnisino- Tlunorarv in support of his argument, and continued— How could England refuse to recognise a war width Mr Seward himself had announced to bo a civil war nine, twelve, and sixteen days before the proclamation ? Who could complain that England had re cognised the civil war which the United States had admitted some weeks before? In conclusion, he thought a friendly arrange me nt of this difficulty still practicable, lie deprecated the debate. The friendly reception of Mr Thornton at Washington was a pledge of peace. The British Ministers are ready to leave the question to Unpeople of the entire world. Mr W. E. Fobstee, member for Bradford, thought that Air Seward’s view of the question of the recognition of the Alabama claims deserved better treatment and more careful consideration, as being perhaps the view that was right and sensible. He complained of the abrupt termination of the question which had been made, when the universal wish in the United Kingdom was for its speedy settlement. Ho thought tout had any influential statesman been sent to the United States as Minister the point in dispute might be readily adjusted. Air John SxtTAHr Mile, member for Westminster, was the next speaker. He regarded the present condition of the question as the result of a mutual mistake. The real question was, whether England was bound to prevent such expeditions as that of the Alabama. He denied that the United States government claimed or could claim that the recognition of the South was a violation of the law, but only that it was an unfriendly, rash, and unprecedented act. The American government only pressed the point for the purpose of showing that, but for the unfriendly action of England the Alabama depredations would not have occurred. He thought that an arbiter between the two countries was needless, and that reparation was fairly due to the United States. Ho concluded by advising the appointment of a mixed commission for the proper adjustment of tiie question.

Air \V. E. Gladstone, member for •South Lancashire, thanked Air Lefevre for his able speech, and Lord Stanley for his temperate reply. Ha (Air G.) could not understand why the negotiation was ended, aor could he agree with Air Alili that Lord Stanley had admitted that reparation was due, or that arbiters would surely decide against England. For himself, he doubted tl reparation for (he Alabama depredations was due to the United States. It yvus unquestionably right that the point should be referred to a commission; but if the Government feared such a reference, it should ■eitle the matter at once or leave the decision with an umpire. Ho (Air Gladstone) inferred, however, from th- closing sentence of Lord Stanley, that communications between tho two governments were not closed, and that friendly feelings between tho United States and England would bo ’preserved. Ho concluded bv saying if hii inference was correct the

whole country would support Lord Stanley iu a just and honorable settlement of the

case. Tho debate ended with Mr Gladstone’s remarks.